similar to: Updated 2.4 htree patches available for 2.4.21-pre5

Hi! I was testing 2.6.0-test5, but got lots of journal aborted errors. Then I Sysrq-s/u/b and wanted to boot 2.4.23-pre3 or 2.4.22, but ext3 error: cannot find root fs cannot mount because of unsupported optional feature (4) after trying to mount it with ext2 (rootfstype=ext2, not working) I rebooted again into 2.4.22, this time there was just severe fs corrpution, illegal blocks, inodes,

Hi all! I have a slight problem: I have an external disk which contains one big filesystem (like a floppy) type ext3 (If you ask why: blame udev or maxtor, or me because I am stupid) which is approx 60% filled. Now I want to have a partition table, ie a layout where the current filesystem is the first partition, and the rest is as usual. Is this possible withotu destroying the data? Best

I've backported all of the bugfixes to the 2.5 dxdir/htree patches to 2.4, and have created a new set of patches for Linux 2.4.21rc5. At this point it *looks* like we've fixed all of the htree bugs that people have reported, including the brelse bug, the memory leak bugs, and the NFS compatibility problems. I've done *very* light testing, and things seem to work, but I'm now

Apologies for the newbie question: I have a (stock) 2.4.20 build (*not* -ac), and I'm trying to work with large ext3 directories. By large, I mean 160,000 files per directory. (Yes, I know it would be better in nested directories but such is life). I feel htree would benefit me. Having upgraded from an earlier version of 2.4, I don't see any change, and close reading of the 2.4 changelog

Hello, Could someone create some newer htree patches for the 2.4.x kernel? There are some bug fixes in the 2.4.21-rc releases that would be nice to have but the htree patches preceed those and they won't apply cleanly to later pre/rc kernels. It sounds like Marcelo may be about ready to put out 2.4.21 so it may just be worth holding off until that happens, but I don't suspect much will

Hi, Just thought I'd share some test results of mine in case anyone is interested. Basically the tests are siumulating what our product does with files - although the tests do it a lot quicker (not as many files though). The test is to create 1 million files (each containing the text of the file number) spread over a number of directories. The files are then removed in the same manner as

Hi Guys, I am quite keen to try out the new htree extensions to ext3 however I wish to use them under NFS. I have noticed comments from the developers saying that it doesn't work properly under NFS. What exactly is the current status of the issue?

Hi all, I've pushed my current set of ext3 diffs (against Marcelo's current tree) to http://people.redhat.com/sct/patches/ext3-2.4/dev-20030314/ This includes: 00-merged/ diffs recently merged into 2.4 10-core-fixes-other/ misc fixes/tweaks from akpm, adilger 11-core-fixes-sct/ misc fixes/tweaks from sct 20-tytso-updates/ Ted's recent updates 21-updates-sct/ recent sct diffs

Just out of curiosity: Is htree in 2.6.0-test11 ? -- Ralf Hildebrandt (Im Auftrag des Referat V a) Ralf.Hildebrandt@charite.de Charite - Universitätsmedizin Berlin Tel. +49 (0)30-450 570-155 Gemeinsame Einrichtung von FU- und HU-Berlin Fax. +49 (0)30-450 570-916 Referat V a - Kommunikationsnetze - AIM. ralfpostfix

Hi Guys, I have experienced a recent performance issue with an ext2 filesystem. Essentially I have had several files that get overwritten on average once per day. This has been happening for about a hear when the program accessing and reading those files started from several milliseconds to 15-20 seconds to open and read the file. Moving the directory to a new name and copying the contents

Dear R experts, I am in transition to the R system from other statistical systems I was using (SPSS, Statistica, etc.). I have used R for a few months on my Windows PC, but now I would like to install R on a Linux box with SuSE 8.1. I downloaded the RPM for SuSE 8.1 from the CRAN mirror. But when I run the INSTALL script using the midnight commander it gives the following error message: #

An update to the ext3 filesystem for 2.4 kernels is available at http://www.uow.edu.au/~andrewm/linux/ext3/ The diffs are against linux-2.4.7 and linux-2.4.6-ac5. The changelog is there. One rarely-occurring but oopsable bug was fixed and several quite significant performance enhancements have been made. These are in addition to the performance fixes which went into 0.9.3. Ted has put out a

Hi Alan, thanks for your answer. > I do not recognize this problem based on your description. Please post > the dmesg log. Here cleaned output of journalctl, removed mainly networkmanager stuff. This is about a wake up after sleep, where before the stick was ok. More details necessary, let me know. Thanks Norbert

Hi Alan, sorry for the journalctl output. I have now done the following:L * boot into 3.17-rc7 * mount the usb stick (recovery completed) * unmount, mount, unmount - just to be sure all is fine * started usbmon capturing on bus 3 * mount the usb stick * suspend to ram * wake up now the stick is "officially" mounted (/proc/mounts) * umount error messages pop up * try to mount more

On Sun, 28 Sep 2014, Norbert Preining wrote: > Hi Alan, > > thanks for your answer. > > > I do not recognize this problem based on your description. Please post > > the dmesg log. > > Here cleaned output of journalctl, removed mainly networkmanager stuff. I would have preferred to see the output from dmesg, as I requested. But never mind, there probably

Optimizations by reducing the STREQ operations and do some code cleanup. Signed-off-by: Wanlong Gao <gaowanlong at cn.fujitsu.com> --- daemon/mkfs.c | 29 +++++++++++++---------------- 1 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-) diff --git a/daemon/mkfs.c b/daemon/mkfs.c index a2c2366..7757623 100644 --- a/daemon/mkfs.c +++ b/daemon/mkfs.c @@ -44,13 +44,16 @@ do_mkfs_opts (const

I decided that I would try out 2.5.44, and I noticed that htree was merged. If I don't do the tune2fs -O dir_index, and e2fsck -D, the (exisintg) fs won't use htree, right? Once I do the tune2fs and e2fsck, will I still be able to go back to a non-htree kernel if needed? (Will a htree-ized fs work on a non-htree kernel?) I'm guessing that it won't. I've seen a 2.4 htree

Dear all, (please Cc) I am running latest kernel (3.17-rc6) and I see corruption of an usb3.0 device usb stick. Strange errors, impossibility to mount. Repeated unplugging and replugging helps sometimes, in all cases recovery is necessary. Is this a know problem, a problem of my system Debian/sid, uptodate, self-compiled kernel of the suspend program (that initiates the suspend), the usb

Well here is what I got from testing htree with NFS. http://labs.zianet.com/benchmarks_html/postmark_benchmarks_NFS_100_htree.html It looks like htree improves performance when the storage device is local(as per my previous post) but it looks like htree degrades performance when used in conjunction with NFS. I am going to try it with gigabit ethernet when I get the time to see if maybe I am

Apologies for the newbie question: I have a (stock) 2.4.20 build (*not* -ac), and I'm trying to work with large ext3 directories. By large, I mean 160,000 files per directory. (Yes, I know it would be better in nested directories but such is life). I feel htree would benefit me. Close reading of the 2.4 changelog suggests that htree isn't in there - only a patch to prevent non-htree